DOCSLIB.ORG

Myanmar: UN Human Rights Council Must Urge Newly-Elected Government to Prioritise Legal Reform to Guarantee the Right to Freedom of Expression

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Myanmar: UN Human Rights Council Must Urge Newly-Elected Government to Prioritise Legal Reform to Guarantee the Right to Freedom of Expression Myanmar: UN Human Rights Council must urge newly-elected government to prioritise legal reform to guarantee the right to freedom of expression 23 December 2020 ARTICLE 19 Free Word Centre 60 Farringdon Road London, EC1R 3GA United Kingdom T: +44 20 7324 2500 F: +44 20 7490 0566 E: [email protected] W: www.article19.org Tw: @article19org Fb: facebook.com/article19org © ARTICLE 19, 2020 This work is provided under the Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-ShareAlike 2.5 licence. You are free to copy, distribute and display this work and to make derivative works, provided you: 1) give credit to ARTICLE 19; 2) do not use this work for commercial purposes; 3) distribute any works derived from this publication under a licence identical to this one. To access the full legal text of this licence, please visit: http://creativecommons. org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/legalcode. ARTICLE 19 would appreciate receiving a copy of any materials in which information from this report is used. Introduction 2 CONTENTS Introduction 4 Prosecution of journalists, human rights defenders, and others exercising the right to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly 4 Digital rights 6 Suppression of expression during the 2020 elections 8 Hate speech 10 Introduction 3 INTRODUCTION One year after the Human Rights Council (‘the Council’) adopted Resolution 43/261 on the situation of human rights in Myanmar, the government’s efforts to suppress dissent continue unabated. In the past year, despite the Council’s recommendation that Myanmar repeal or amend laws that criminalise expression, Myanmar authorities have continued to prosecute journalists, human rights defenders and others who speak critically of the government or military. Myanmar authorities have used the pandemic as a pretext to arrest and prosecute journalists whose reporting contradicts official narratives and to shut down ethnic media outlets reporting on human rights violations in conflict-affected areas. Despite overtures by Myanmar authorities about the importance of a free and fair election,2 the Union Election Commission (‘UEC’) issued measures ahead of the November 2020 general election that censored expression critical of the incumbent government and the military. More than a year after the Myanmar government initiated an Internet shutdown in Rakhine and Chin States, the government continues to restrict 3G and 4G mobile Internet service. The restrictions disproportionately harm vulnerable minorities, impede the reporting of human rights violations, and block the dissemination of crucial public health information during the COVID-19 pandemic. ARTICLE 19 urges the Human Rights Council to adopt a strong resolution calling on the recently re- elected National League for Democracy government to prioritise legal reform and to guarantee the right to freedom of expression, access to information, and peaceful assembly in the country. PROSECUTION OF JOURNALISTS, HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS, AND OTHERS EXERCISING THE RIGHTS TO FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND PEACEFUL ASSEMBLY The Human Rights Council has repeatedly called upon the Myanmar government to halt criminal proceedings against those exercising their rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly.3 Nevertheless, over the past year, Myanmar authorities have continued to target those who criticise military actions, government policies, and the conduct of government officials. The Myanmar government has continued to use Section 505(b) of the Penal Code to bring charges against human rights defenders. In one such instance, on 7 March, Myanmar authorities attempted to arrest environmental activist Saw Tha Phoe after the General Administration Department filed charges under section 505(b) of the Penal Code for Saw Tha Phoe’s role in protesting pollution from a cement factory operated by the Myanmar Economic Corporation, a military-owned conglomerate.4 1 Human Rights Council, Situation of human rights in Myanmar, UN Doc. A/HRC/RES/43/26, 22 June 2020. 2 Myanmar held general elections on 8 November 2020. 3 Id. at para. 21. 4 ARTICLE 19, Myanmar: Drop Charges against Karen environmental activist Saw Tha Phoe, 12 March 2020, available at: https://www.article19.org/resources/myanmar-drop-charges-against-karen-environmental-activist-saw-tha-phoe/; Lawi Weng, ‘Environmental Activist Faces Arrest in Myanmar’s Karen State, Rights Groups Object’, The Irrawaddy, 10 March 2020, Introduction 4 In the past year, authorities have at times targeted journalists reporting on the COVID-19 pandemic. In May 2020, a Hpa-An court convicted Zaw Min Oo, chief editor of the Hpa-An-based Dae Pyaw news agency, of violating Section 505(b) of the Penal Code and sentenced him to two years’ imprisonment. Zaw Min Oo had reported via a Facebook post that a COVID-19 death had occurred on the Thai- Myanmar border, but the information on which the report was based was later retracted.5 On 1 July 2020, the Criminal Investigation Department filed a complaint against Eleven Myanmar journalist Aung Ko Ko under section 68(a) of the Telecommunications Law for criticising government underreporting and a lack of transparency regarding COVID-19 in a Facebook post.6 Section 68(a) carries a maximum penalty of one year’s imprisonment and a fine. Myanmar authorities have also brought charges against non-journalists who have criticised the government’s response to the pandemic. In March 2020, the owner of the Facebook account ‘Nyan Lin Htat Referee’ was charged with sedition under Section 124(a) of the Penal Code for his claim that government officials, including State Counsellor Aung Sun Suu Kyi, did not follow their own COVID-19 protocols.7 Sedition carries a maximum penalty of twenty years imprisonment. In May 2020, Myanmar authorities charged three people from Bago Region under Section 66(d) of the Telecommunications Law and Section 505(b) of the Penal Code for ‘verbally abusing’ the Bago Chief Minister for his closure of factories in the region.8 In July 2020, Myanmar authorities charged Zaw Naing Oo, a Sagaing politician, under Section 505(b) of the Penal Code after he criticised the regional government’s response to the pandemic.9 Myanmar authorities have also brought charges under a variety of laws to punish protesters. On 7 July, Yangon police charged free speech activist and poet Maung Saungkha under the Peaceful Assembly and Peaceful Procession Law in relation to a protest against the Internet shutdowns in Rakhine and Chin States; he was later convicted.10 Earlier in the year, nine students were each sentenced to one month in prison with hard labour for their role in a 23 February protest condemning the Internet shutdown and calling for those responsible for the Myanmar military’s alleged shelling of a primary school in in Rakhine State’s Buthidaung township to be held accountable for their actions.11 In September 2020, several students organised a series of campaigns across the country to bring awareness to human rights violations in Rakhine and Chin States. In response, Myanmar authorities available at: https://www.irrawaddy.com/news/burma/environmental-activist-faces-arrest-myanmars-karen-state-rights-groups- object.html. 5 Toe Wai Aung, ‘Editor in Kayin State sentenced to jail over COVID-19 story’, Myanmar Times, 21 May 2020, available at: https://www.mmtimes.com/news/editor-kayin-state-sentenced-jail-over-covid-19-story.html. 6 Nay Yaing, ‘EMG reporter from Nay Pyi Taw sued for Facebook comment about Covid-19’, Eleven Myanmar, 2 July 2020, available at: https://elevenmyanmar.com/news/emg-reporter-from-nay-pyi-taw-sued-for-facebook-comment-about-covid-19. 7 ‘Facebook user faces sedition charge for criticising Aung San Suu Kyi’, 15 May 2020, Myanmar Mix, available at: https://myanmarmix.com/en/articles/facebook-user-faces-sedition-charge-for-criticising-aung-san-suu-kyi. 8 Assistance Association for Political Prisoners, ‘Cases Related to COVID-19 Pandemic for May 2020’, available at: https://aappb.org/2020/06/11306/. 9 The Voice, 16 July 2020, available at: http://thevoicemyanmar.com/news/42553-ndf. 10 ARTICLE 19, ‘Myanmar: Drop Charge against Activist Poet’, 2 September 2020, available at: https://www.article19.org/resources/myanmar-drop-charge-against-activist-poet/; Amnesty International, ‘Myanmar: Poet convicted for protesting against internet restrictions’, 4 September 2020, available at: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2020/09/myanmar-poet-convicted-for-protesting-against-internet-restrictions/. 11 ARTICLE 19, ‘Myanmar: Drop Charge against Activist Poet’, 2 September 2020, available at: https://www.article19.org/resources/myanmar-drop-charge-against-activist-poet/. Prosecution of journalists, human rights defenders, and others exercising the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly 5 charged dozens of student activists under Section 19 of the Peaceful Assembly and Peaceful Possession Law and Sections 505(a) and (b) of the Penal Code. Kyaw Thiha Ye Kyaw and Soe Hla Naing — students who were jointly responsible for organising the campaigns in Mandalay — have been sentenced to more than seven years’ imprisonment each.12 The targeting of activists has continued unabated following the 2020 election. In December 2020, three members of the Rakhine Youth New Generation Network were arrested after demonstrating for human rights in Sittwe.13 They were later charged under Section 19 of the Peaceful Assembly and Peaceful Possession Law.14 The Council must continue to expressly call for the repeal or reform of criminal laws that impermissibly restrict the rights to freedom of expression, information, peaceful assembly and association including the Media Law, the Official Secrets Act, the Unlawful Associations Act, the Peaceful Assembly and Peaceful Procession Law, Sections 66(d) and 68(a) of the Telecommunications Law, and Sections 499-500 and 505 of the Penal Code. The Council should also call upon the government of Myanmar to repeal or reform in line with international standards Sections 124(a), 153, and 295A of the Penal Code and Sections 33 and 34(d) of the Electronic Transactions Law.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Crimes in Burma
    Crimes in Burma A Report By Table of Contents Preface iii Executive Summary 1 Methodology 5 I. History of Burma 7 A. Early History and Independence in 1948 7 B. Military Rule: 1962-1988 9 C. The 1988 Popular Uprising and Democratic Elections in 1990 11 D. Military Rule Since 1988 12 II. International Criminal Law Framework 21 A. Crimes Against Humanity: Chapeau or Common Elements 24 B. War Crimes: Chapeau or Common Elements 27 C. Enumerated or Prohibited Acts 30 III. Human Rights Violations in Burma 37 A. Forced Displacement 39 B. Sexual Violence 51 C. Extrajudicial Killings and Torture 64 D. Legal Evaluation 74 ii Preface IV. Precedents for Action 77 A. The Security Council’s Chapter VII Powers 78 B. The Former Yugoslavia 80 C. Rwanda 82 D. Darfur 84 E. Burma 86 Conclusion 91 Appendix 93 Acknowledgments 103 Preface For many years, the world has watched with horror as the human rights nightmare in Burma has unfolded under military rule. The struggle for democracy of Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and other political prisoners since 1988 has captured the imagination of people around the world. The strength of Buddhist monks and their Saffron Revolution in 2007 brought Burma to the international community’s attention yet again. But a lesser known story—one just as appalling in terms of human rights—has been occurring in Burma over the past decade and a half: epidemic levels of forced labor in the 1990s, the recruitment of tens of thousands of child soldiers, widespread sexual violence, extrajudicial killings and torture, and more than a million displaced persons.
    [Show full text]
  • Q&A on Elections in BURMA
    Q&A ON ELECTIONS IN BURMA PHOTOGRapHS BY PLATON Q&A ON ELECTIONS IN BuRma INTRODUCTION PHOTOGRapHS BY PLATON Burma will hold multi-party elections on November 7, 2010, the first in 20 years. Some contend the elections could spark a gradual process of democratization and the opening of civil society space in Burma. Human Rights Watch believes that the elections must be seen in the context of the Burmese military government’s carefully manufactured electoral process over many years that is designed to ensure continued military rule, albeit with a civilian façade. The generals’ “Road Map to Disciplined Democracy” has been a path filled with human rights violations: the brutal crackdown on peaceful protesters in 2007, the doubling of the number of political prisoners in Burma since then to more than 2000, the marginalization of WIN MIN, CIVIL RIGHTS LEADER ethnic minority communities in border areas, a rewritten constitution that A medical student at the time, Win undermines rights and guarantees continued military rule, and carefully Min became a leader of the 1988 constructed electoral laws that subtly bar the main opposition candidates. pro-democracy demonstrations in Burma. After years fighting in the jungle, Win Min has become one of the This political repression takes place in an environment that already sharply restricts most articulate intellectuals in exile. freedom of association, assembly, and expression. Burma’s media is tightly controlled Educated at Harvard University, he is by the authorities, and many media outlets trying to report on the elections have been now one of the driving forces behind an innovative collective called the Vahu (in reduced to reporting on official announcements’ and interviews with party leaders: no Burmese: Plural) Development Institute, public opinion or opposition is permitted.
    [Show full text]
  • MYANMAR: Why the U.S
    SUPPORTING HUMAN RIGHTS IN MYANMAR: Why the U.S. Should Maintain Existing Sanctions Authority MAY 2016 SUPPORTING HUMAN RIGHTS IN MYANMAR 1 COVER PHOTO: Kachin Independence Army soldiers on patrol, Kachin State © Ryan Roco 2013 Fortify Rights works to ensure and defend human rights for all. We investigate human rights abuses, engage stakeholders, and strengthen initiatives led by human rights defenders, affected communities, and civil society. We believe in the effectiveness of evidence-based research, the power of strategic truth telling, and the importance of working in close collaboration with individuals, communities, and movements. Fortify Rights is an independent, nonprofit organization based in Southeast Asia and registered in the United States and Switzerland. www.fortifyrights.org United to End Genocide is the largest activist organization in America dedicated to preventing and ending genocide and mass atrocities worldwide. The United to End Genocide community includes faith leaders, students, artists, investors and genocide survivors, and all those who believe we must fulfill the promise the world made following the Holocaust-“Never Again!” www.endgenocide.org SUPPORTING HUMAN RIGHTS IN MYANMAR: Why the U.S. Should Maintain Existing Sanctions Authority MAY 2016 SUPPORTING HUMAN RIGHTS IN MYANMAR 4 CONTENTS SUMMARY................................................................................................................................ 1 METHODOLOGY .....................................................................................................................5
    [Show full text]
  • 050411.Pos Com Burma1
    RELEX 11/04/2005 POSITION COMMUNE DU CONSEIL du prorogeant et modifiant les mesures restrictives à l'encontre de la Birmanie/du Myanmar LE CONSEIL DE L'UNION EUROPÉENNE, vu le traité sur l'Union européenne, et notamment son article 15, considérant ce qui suit: (1) Le 26 avril 2004, le Conseil a arrêté la position commune 2004/423/PESC 1 renouvelant les mesures restrictives à l'encontre de la Birmanie/du Myanmar. (2) Le 25 octobre 2004, le Conseil a arrêté la position commune 2004/730/PESC 2 concernant des mesures restrictives supplémentaires à l'encontre de la Birmanie/du Myanmar et modifiant la position commune 2004/423/PESC. (3) Le 21 février 2005, le Conseil a arrêté la position commune 2005/149/PESC 3 modifiant l'Annexe II de la position commune 2004/423/PESC. (4) L'Union européenne rappelle sa position sur la situation politique qui règne en Birmanie/au Myanmar et considère que les développements récents ne justifient pas une suspension des mesures restrictives. (5) En conséquence, les mesures restrictives à l'encontre de la Birmanie/du Myanmar énoncées par la position commune 2004/423/PESC, telle que modifiée respectivement par les positions communes 2004/730/PESC et 2005/149/PESC, devraient rester en vigueur. (6) Le Conseil considère que, bien que certaines mesures imposées par la position commune 2004/423/PESC visent des personnes associées au régime birmanes/du Myanmar ainsi que les membres de leur famille, les enfants en-dessous de 18 ans, ne devraient, en principe, pas être ciblés. (7) Il convient d'apporter des modifications techniques aux listes annexées à la position commune 2004/423/PESC.
    [Show full text]
  • DASHED HOPES the Criminalization of Peaceful Expression in Myanmar WATCH
    HUMAN RIGHTS DASHED HOPES The Criminalization of Peaceful Expression in Myanmar WATCH Dashed Hopes The Criminalization of Peaceful Expression in Myanmar Copyright © 2019 Human Rights Watch All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America ISBN: 978-1-6231-36970 Cover design by Rafael Jimenez Human Rights Watch defends the rights of people worldwide. We scrupulously investigate abuses, expose the facts widely, and pressure those with power to respect rights and secure justice. Human Rights Watch is an independent, international organization that works as part of a vibrant movement to uphold human dignity and advance the cause of human rights for all. Human Rights Watch is an international organization with staff in more than 40 countries, and offices in Amsterdam, Beirut, Berlin, Brussels, Chicago, Geneva, Goma, Johannesburg, London, Los Angeles, Moscow, Nairobi, New York, Paris, San Francisco, Sydney, Tokyo, Toronto, Tunis, Washington DC, and Zurich. For more information, please visit our website: http://www.hrw.org FEBRUARY 2019 ISBN: 978-1-6231-36970 Dashed Hopes The Criminalization of Peaceful Expression in Myanmar Summary ........................................................................................................................... 1 Methodology ...................................................................................................................... 5 I. Background ..................................................................................................................... 6 II. Section 66(d)
    [Show full text]
  • SUPPORTING the MOVEMENT for a FREE and DEMOCRATIC BURMA 2002-2012 “We Have Been Knocking on This Door for a Long Time and It’S Never Opened
    THE STORY OF OUR IMPACT SUPPORTING THE MOVEMENT FOR A FREE AND DEMOCRATIC BURMA 2002-2012 “We have been knocking on this door for a long time and it’s never opened. Now we are knocking and it’s opened a little. We are ready to struggle and push it until it opens further.” — Karen Human Rights Group, an AJWS grantee working on human rights in Burma “If you stand together, your voice will be heard.” —Women’s human rights activist and AJWS grantee, Burma ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This case study was written by Elyse Lightman Samuels, in collaboration with AJWS’s staff working on Burma, and with editing support from Leah Kaplan Robins. It was designed by Davyd Pittman and Elizabeth Leih. We would like to thank our courageous grantees cited in this case study, who provided valuable input on the history of the civil and political rights movement in Burma and key feedback on drafts. Without them, this story would not be possible. PUBLISHED JULY 2012 COVER Monks, nuns and other citizens march in a peaceful demonstration during the Saffron Revolution. PHOTO BETH JONES Table of Contents Introduction 2 Background: Mounting Terror and Early Attempts at Opposition 3 Documenting and Voicing Shared Problems Leads to Results 3 Women are Empowered to Take the Lead 4 Underground Communications Efforts Support the Saffron Revolution 5 A Disaster Spawns Further Growth of the Grassroots Movement 6 Women Insist that Burma’s Crimes be Investigated 6 Citizens Demand Fair Elections and a Constitution that Ensures Equality for All 6 The Door to Human Rights Begins to Open 7 Civil Society Plays a Role in Peace Negotiations 8 Volunteers Help Build Sustainable Organizations 8 Looking Ahead 8 INTRODUCTION The story of Burma is one of the most profound examples of progress in global justice that AJWS has ever seen.
    [Show full text]
  • No 667/2005 of 28 April 2005 Amending Council Regulation (EC) No 798/2004 Renewing the Restrictive Measures in Respect of Burma/Myanmar
    29.4.2005EN Official Journal of the European Union L 108/35 COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 667/2005 of 28 April 2005 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 798/2004 renewing the restrictive measures in respect of Burma/Myanmar THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, (4) Article 12(b) of Regulation (EC) No 798/2004 empowers the Commission to amend Annexes III and IV on the Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European basis of decisions taken in respect of Annexes I and II Community, to Common Position 2004/423/CFSP (2), renewing restrictive measures against Burma/Myanmar. Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 798/2004 of 26 April 2004 renewing the restrictive measures in respect of Burma/Myanmar (1), and in particular Article 12 thereof, (5) Common Position 2005/340/CFSP (3) amends Annexes I and II to Common Position 2004/423/CFSP. Annexes III Whereas: and IV to Regulation (EC) No 798/2004 should, therefore, be amended accordingly. In order to ensure (1) Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 798/2004 lists the that the measures provided for in this Regulation are competent authorities to which specific functions effective, this Regulation must enter into force imme- related to the implementation of that regulation are diately, attributed. Article 12(a) of Regulation (EC) No 798/2004 empowers the Commission to amend Annex II on the basis of information supplied by Member States. HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: Belgium, Hungary, the Netherlands and Sweden have informed the Commission of changes regarding their competent authorities. Annex II to Regulation (EC) No Article 1 798/2004 should, therefore, be amended.
    [Show full text]
  • Sputum Smear-Positive Case
    Report on National TB Prevalence Survey 2009-2010 Acknowledgements The National Tuberculosis Prevalence Survey 2009-2010 for Myanmar was conducted by the National Tuberculosis Programme (NTP), Department of Health (DOH), Ministry of Health (MOH), the Union of Myanmar with the technical support from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Research Institute of Tuberculosis/Japan Anti-Tuberculosis Association (RIT/JATA). Financial, human resources and technical support for the survey were provided by the MOH, WHO, Three Diseases Fund, Japan International Cooperation Agency, RIT/JATA, Population Services International and the United States Agency for International Development (see Annex 1). For data collection, NTP coordinated with state, regional, district and township health authorities. Local laboratory technicians and Basic Health Staff worked closely with the survey teams. The contribution of the Myanmar Health Assistant Association was also of great value in completing data collection, data cleaning and data entry. In addition, volunteers, local authorities and local communities participated and made great contributions to the survey. The NTP is most grateful to MOH for its guidance and approval of this survey and for the continual encouragement which enabled NTP to complete the survey during a challenging period. We express our deep thanks and appreciation to all organizations and individuals for their contribution in making this survey successful. We record our special thanks to Dr Hans H. Kluge from WHO for his strong support for this survey, and to Dr Ikushi Onozaki of WHO and Dr Norio Yamada of RIT/JATA for their tremendous contributions. It is our hope both that the survey’s findings reflect our country’s actual disease burden, and also that it will lead to constructive changes in future plans to control tuberculosis in Myanmar.
    [Show full text]
  • FIDH Report Half Empty: Burma's Political Parties and Their Human Rights Commitments
    Half Empty: Burma’s political parties and their human rights commitments November 2015 / N°668a November © AFP PHOTO / Soe Than Win MPs attend parliamentary session in Naypyidaw on July 4, 2012. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Foreword 4 2. Executive summary 4 3. Methodology 5 4. Outgoing Parliament disappoints on human rights 7 11 5.1 - Media freedom 12 5.2 - Religious discrimination 12 5.3 - Role of the military 13 5.4 - Accountability for past crimes 13 5.5 - Legislative reform 14 5.6 - Women’s rights 14 5.7 - Death penalty 14 5.8 - Ethnic minority rights 15 15 5.10 - Human rights defenders 15 5.11 - Investment, development, and infrastructure projects 16 5.12 - Next government’s top priorities 16 6. Recommendations to elected MPs 17 7. Appendixes 20 7.1 - Appendix 1: Survey’s complete results 20 7.2 - Appendix 2: Political parties contesting the 8 November election 25 1. FOREWORD By Tomás Ojea Quintana, former UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar to visit the new Parliament in Myanmar, I was able to economic course. 2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Suu Kyi, is expected to win. 1 Burma Issues & Concerns Vol. 6: The generals’ election, January 2011 4 FIDH - HALF EMPTY: BURMA’S POLITICAL PARTIES AND THEIR HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITMENTS concerns. The report provides numerous recommendations to MPs, based on statements and reports issued by various UN special procedures as well as resolutions adopted by 3. METHODOLOGY [See Appendix 2: Political parties contesting the 8 November election Appendix 1: Survey’s complete results FIDH - HALF EMPTY: BURMA’S POLITICAL PARTIES AND THEIR HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITMENTS 5 6 FIDH - HALF EMPTY: BURMA’S POLITICAL PARTIES AND THEIR HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITMENTS 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Acts Adopted Under Title V of the Treaty on European Union)
    L 108/88EN Official Journal of the European Union 29.4.2005 (Acts adopted under Title V of the Treaty on European Union) COUNCIL COMMON POSITION 2005/340/CFSP of 25 April 2005 extending restrictive measures against Burma/Myanmar and amending Common Position 2004/423/CFSP THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, (8) In the event of a substantial improvement in the overall political situation in Burma/Myanmar, the suspension of Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in these restrictive measures and a gradual resumption of particular Article 15 thereof, cooperation with Burma/Myanmar will be considered, after the Council has assessed developments. Whereas: (9) Action by the Community is needed in order to (1) On 26 April 2004, the Council adopted Common implement some of these measures, Position 2004/423/CFSP renewing restrictive measures 1 against Burma/Myanmar ( ). HAS ADOPTED THIS COMMON POSITION: (2) On 25 October 2004, the Council adopted Common Position 2004/730/CFSP on additional restrictive Article 1 measures against Burma/Myanmar and amending Annexes I and II to Common Position 2004/423/CFSP shall be Common Position 2004/423/CFSP (2). replaced by Annexes I and II to this Common Position. (3) On 21 February 2005, the Council adopted Common Position 2005/149/CFSP amending Annex II to Article 2 Common Position 2004/423/CFSP (3). Common Position 2004/423/CFSP is hereby renewed for a period of 12 months. (4) The Council would recall its position on the political situation in Burma/Myanmar and considers that recent developments do not justify suspension of the restrictive Article 3 measures.
    [Show full text]
  • A Chance to Fix in Time” Analysis of Freedom of Expression in Four Years Under the Current Government
    Athan – Freedom of Expression Activist Organization “A Chance to Fix in Time” Analysis of Freedom of Expression in Four Years Under the Current Government 4 Research Report “A Chance to Fix in Time” Analysis of Freedom of Expression in Four Years Under the Current Government Research Report Athan – Freedom of Expression Activist Organization A Chance to Fix in Time: Analysis of Freedom of Expression in Four Years Under the Current Government Table of Contents Chapters Contents Pages Organisational Background d - Research Methodology 2 - Photo Copyright Chapter (1): Introduction 2 1.1 Background 1 1.2 Overall Analysis of Prosecutions within Four Years 4 Chapter (2): Freedom of Expression 8 2.1 Lawsuits under Telecommunications Law 9 2.2 Lawsuits under the Law Protecting the Privacy and Security 14 of Citizens 2.3 National Record and Archive Law 17 2.4 Lawsuits under Section 505(a), (b) and (c) of the Penal Code 18 2.5 Lawsuits under Section 500 of the Penal Code 23 2.6 Electronic Transactions Law Must Be Repealed 24 2.7 Lawsuits with Sedition Charge under Section 124(a) of the 25 Penal Code 2.8 Lawsuits under Section 295 of the Penal Code 26 2.9 Three Stats Where Free Expression Violated Most 27 Chapter (3): Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and Procession 30 3.1 More Restrictions Included in Drafted Amendment Bill 31 Chapter (4): Media Freedom 34 4.1 News Media Law Lacks of Protection for Media Freedom and 34 Journalistic Rights 4.2 The Tatmadaw’s Filing Lawsuits Against Irrawaddy and 36 Reuters News Agencies a Table of Contents A Chance to
    [Show full text]
  • Special Report No
    SPECIAL REPORT NO. 463 | FEBRUARY 2020 UNITED STATES INSTITUTE OF PEACE www.usip.org The Intersection of Investment and Conflict in Myanmar By Priscilla Clapp Contents The Belt and Road in Myanmar ....................................3 Promoting Sustainable Development ............................... 5 Impediments to Implementation .............................7 Promoting Development in Conflict Areas ......................... 10 Engaging Civil Society ............... 13 Promoting Peace ........................ 15 Conclusion ................................... 16 Construction workers ride to the site of the Thilawa Special Economic Zone, approximately fifteen miles south of Yangon, on May 8, 2015. (Photo by Soe Zeya Tun/Reuters) Summary • In 2018, Myanmar’s government major political and institutional to bind the two economies ever launched a new policy framework impediments, including military more closely together. for guiding the country’s long-term control of certain political and • To compensate for the lack of gov- development plans. If fully imple- economic sectors, corruption, and ernment capacity to implement mented, the policy would apply armed conflict in the country’s re- the new policy, Naypyidaw would international standards and norms source-rich periphery. be well advised to harness the to its regulation of large-scale de- • Responding to Myanmar’s de- talents of the country’s civil soci- velopment projects undertaken by sire to modernize its infrastruc- ety organizations, many of which commercial and state-owned en- ture, Myanmar and China have are already active in conflict areas terprises and joint ventures. agreed in principle to develop a and could help local communities • The policy, however, is likely to China-Myanmar Economic Cor- ensure that their interests will be remain largely aspirational unless ridor with extensive Chinese in- served by the new investments.
    [Show full text]